Government to introduce under-16 social media ban bill on Monday

The government will introduce legislation on Monday to ban social media for under-16s, with Education Minister Erica Stanford leading the work.

The bill sets up an online safety regulator within the Department of Internal Affairs — the government department that handles things like citizenship and gambling regulation. The regulator would have the power to monitor, investigate and enforce compliance. Penalties under the bill target social media companies, not users. Stanford said the bill places legal obligations on platforms and proposes no penalties for children, their parents or caregivers RNZ.

Platforms classed as "high risk" in the bill include Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, YouTube, X and Facebook. These would be required to take reasonable steps to verify users are over 16. Acceptable methods under the bill include using existing account information, facial age estimation, digital ID services and formal ID. Platforms would also need to regularly assess the risks they pose and report on how those risks are being identified and reduced.

Messaging apps such as WhatsApp and Discord, and online games like Roblox, are excluded from the bill's scope. AI chatbots primarily for productivity, such as ChatGPT and Gemini, are also out of scope, but social AI companions — apps designed to simulate friendship or conversation — are covered by the ban.

A government factsheet outlines the risks the bill targets: illegal content, harmful content including grooming, cyberbullying, harassment and AI deepfakes, advertising and behavioural profiling, and service design and function.

The legislation's path through Parliament is uncertain. ACT and New Zealand First will not support the bill, having invoked the agree-to-disagree clause available under the coalition framework — a mechanism that allows coalition partners to publicly oppose a piece of legislation without breaking the government apart. That means National will need Labour's support to get the bill past its first reading, the initial vote where MPs decide whether a bill proceeds to select committee scrutiny.

ACT leader David Seymour said the proposed ban won't work and will have side effects. Labour has also indicated it may not support the bill. Science and technology spokesperson Reuben Davidson wrote to Stanford outlining matters the party wants addressed before it will consider backing the legislation.

Davidson's letter asked about consultation with children and young people, how operators could demonstrate compliance, publication of a full privacy impact assessment, and how penalties would be enforced.

The bill follows the government's May 2025 announcement that social media restrictions for under-16s would become part of its work programme, with Stanford tasked to lead the work Beehive. National MP Catherine Wedd's members' bill relates to that work programme.

The broader context here is international. Australia became the first country to enact a sweeping ban on social media use by children under 16, with its law requiring major platforms to block minors from 10 December 2025 Reuters. Australia's eSafety regulator describes its age restrictions as "a delay to having accounts" rather than a ban, and notes there are no penalties for under-16s who access an age-restricted platform eSafety.

New Zealand's approach mirrors Australia's in placing the compliance burden on platforms rather than individuals, but the parliamentary arithmetic is the immediate test. With both coalition partners withholding support, the bill's survival at first reading depends on whether Labour's concerns are sufficiently addressed. Davidson's letter signals Labour is engaged with the policy detail rather than dismissing it outright, but the party has stopped short of committing to support the legislation.

The key question for those watching the legislative process is whether Stanford can satisfy Labour's information requests quickly enough to secure first-reading support, or whether the bill stalls at the first hurdle. The agree-to-disagree mechanism means ACT and NZ First face no consequence for withholding support, leaving National to negotiate across the aisle in a scenario that will test the government's ability to advance signature social policy without its own coalition partners.